Declarative Business Processes: The Unification of BPM Approaches (PDF Download Available)
For full functionality of ResearchGate it is necessary to enable JavaScript.
Here are the .
See all >2 CitationsSee all >2 ReferencesSee all >1 Figure
0.76 · Hogeschool UtrechtAbstractIn today's business process management (BPM) marketplace, organi-In a series of research notes, Be In-formed's research director Jeroen van Grondelle shares his perspective on emerging challenges in the BPM field, and how they can be addressed by a paradigm shift towards declarative busi-ness processes. We welcome your ideas and suggestions on this subject. Please submit your contributions to the author at j.. zations are forced to choose up front between a number of process modeling approaches. These approaches make strong assumptions on the nature of business processes, and as such provide black and white choices in levels of flexibility and expert autonomy provided. Declara-tive business processes cover these different business process styles us-ing a single unified approach. Furthermore, declarative processes allow for mixed levels of flexibility and autonomy within single business pro-cesses, needed when dealing with mixed caseloads by actors of varying expertise levels.Discover the world's research10+ million members100+ million publications100k+ research projects
Declarative Business Processes:The Unification of BPM ApproachesJeroen van GrondelleBe InformedIn today’s business process management (BPM) marketplace, organi- In a series of research notes, Be In-formed’s research director Jeroen vanGrondelle shares his perspective onemerging challenges in the BPM field,and how they can be addressed by aparadigm shift towards declarative busi-ness processes. We welcome your ideasand suggestions on this subject. Pleasesubmit your contributions to the authorat j.v.zations are forced to choose up front between a number of processmodeling approaches. These approaches make strong assumptions onthe nature of business processes, and as such provide black and whitechoices in levels of flexibility and expert autonomy provided. Declara-tive business processes cover these different business process styles us-ing a single unified approach. Furthermore, declarative processes allowfor mixed levels of flexibility and autonomy within single business pro-cesses, needed when dealing with mixed caseloads by actors of varyingexpertise levels.Challenges in Choosing between Current BPM ApproachesThe field of business process management has developed different ap-proaches for what are often perceived as different problems. Orga-nizations adopting BPM have to choose from these approaches, oftenrequiring them to cast their requirements into one of the associatedproblem archetypes.Workflow ManagementWorkflow based approaches, like BPMN, aim to support organizationsthat perform large numbers of similar cases by designing up front thework that needs to be performed in terms of activities, the order theyare performed in and the actors that have to execute them. As the flowsare designed up front, they struggle to offer flexibility in complex caseswhere experts may want or need to deviate from the default flow. Thealternative and exception flows that are typically created to addressthese requirements make the process models hard to maintain andthey still fail in unanticipated situations.Adaptive Case ManagementThe adaptive case management (ACM) approach was developed to of-fer its actors more autonomy in determining how to treat a case. Byallowing them, for instance, to choose/compose an agenda of tasksthey wish to perform or the artifacts they want to create for every in-dividual case, they can maximally leverage their expertise and offera tailor made experience for each case. At the same time, such ap-proaches often lack to provide pro-active support to effectively deal
Jeroen van Grondellewith 80% routine cases and fail to provide consistency in how similarcases are dealt with.Straight Through ProcessingSTP aims to support business processes where the majority of cases isexpected to be processed in a single transaction, and all cases that failto do so are treated as exception cases and require manual interven-tion. By separating the easy cases, that are processed automatically,from the exceptions that need attention, effort is spent only on thecomplex cases. Often, however, intervention on a single aspect of acase leads to that complete case being treated in exception mode, alsoon aspects that could be treated as a default case in principal.Figure 1: BPM Paradigms and theirChallengesAdaptive Case Management(ACM)WorkflowManagement(WFM)StraightThrough Processing(STP)Expert Flexibility in 20% CasesDealing withImpedimentsLocallyProviding Support and Consistency in 80% CasesVariableLevels ofGuidance+
Flow at Runtime
Actor Autonomy at Runtime
+The Unification of BPM ApproachesAdopting a declarative, constraint-based business process manage-ment approach, such as Be Informed’s Declarative Process ModelingNotation1, can help organizations to deal with these dilemmas. In-1Jeroen van Grondelle and MennoGülpers. Specifying Flexible BusinessProcesses using Pre and Post Conditions.In Practice of Enterprise Modeling, vol-ume 92 of Lecture Notes in Business Infor-mation Processing, pages 38–51, 2011stead of designing consolidated activity flows that meet the require-ments of all stakeholders, the constraints themselves are captured.At execution time, business processes within constraints can be com-puted, including all options actors have to choose from in doing so.2
declarative business processes: the unification of bpm approachesWhen applying a constraint based approach, all three conventionalapproaches mentioned can be covered, as the nature of the processesthat are inferred from the constraints follows from the levels and typesof constraints to a large degree.In the whitepaper Towards Webscale Busi-ness Processes, the concept of constraintbased processes was explained by theanalogy of a maze. In a maze, thehedges form constraints, that need to berespected while searching a way throughthe maze.If the combination of requirements, poli-cies and regulations is represented asa maze, process analysts convention-ally have traced the route they foundthrough the maze and captured thesein the form of sequences of navigationinstructions. When adopting a con-straint based approach, the maze itself iscaptured instead, in a precise, machinereadable way, allowing a computer to dothe searching in the maze.In high constraint level situations, the business processes inferredfrom the constraints will have the nature of workflows: in order tomeet all constraints, activities have to be performed in one of a limitednumber of flows and the resulting applications will focus on support-ing users to adhere to those flows.When constraint levels are lower, the number of acceptable activ-ity orders grows fast. ACM type process support emerges, essentiallyallowing users to perform activities as they see fit, only having to re-spect the regulatory baseline that is ever present in today’s businessoperations.In situations where the pre conditions are met in the vast majorityof cases, or can be fulfilled without human intervention, STP scenariosare available. The majority of cases can be processed in a straightthrough way within constraints. In the remainder of cases, the failedconstraints can be treated as impediments and corresponding tasks canbe routed to the relevant actors without requiring an up front processflow to guide it.Mixed Levels of Flexibility and AutonomyToday’s business processes have a number of characteristics that makeit hard for organizations to adopt a single conventional BPM approachand support their business processes end-to-end with the single lev-els of flexibility and autonomy that are an inherent consequence ofthe approach. An important property of constraint based processes isthat they can steplessly shift between process natures within a singlebusiness process. As, given the current process state, more or less con-straints apply, the nature of the behavior within constraints changes,and as a consequence, the type of support offered to the actors changesalong.Providing autonomy to experts within a regulatory frameworkOrganizations need to allow experts flexibility to deal with cases basedon their experience and enable them to deal with exceptional cases forwhich no standard flow is available. The autonomy needed for this isoften at odds with the regulatory context, where any and all businessprocesses need to comply with increasing numbers of rules.3
Jeroen van GrondelleSupporting variable constraint levels within business processesThe Dutch Immigration Service’s busi-ness processes switch between differentconstraint levels. Depending on the pur-pose of stay, intake phases have differ-ent constraint levels on determining whocan enter the procedure. Down the line,domain experts sometimes need auton-omy to deal with subjective aspects inassessments and eligibility decisions.Typically, the level of flexibility is not constant across an entire busi-ness process: Depending on the number of regulations that apply toa certain phase, and the amount of business expertise (and thereforeexperts) required, the nature of the required process support may shiftfrom flow based WFM to autonomous collaboration in an ACM senseand back.Figure 2: Process Nature changes withConstraint LevelsSupporting 80/20 caseloadsCAK yearly processes several billion Eu-ros of healthcare related payments toand from Dutch citizens, with businessprocesses that process the vast major-ity straight-through, but where complexcases are dealt with by experts.In many business processes, the caseload that needs to be dealt withcombines predictable, ‘standard’ cases with a number of complex casesthat require expert attention. While the standard cases may be bestsupported with WFM or STP type application support, the complexcases may require a more autonomous way of working.Supporting actors of different expertise and authorizationA big pension administrator has busi-ness processes to support pension prod-ucts for a number of financial providers.The majority of cases is dealt with bya fixed, experience staff, but on peakloads, temporaries are hired to help pre-vent backlogs.Business processes typically are required to accommodate actors of dif-ferent expertise and experience levels. For instance, the ability to sup-port inexperienced temporary employees is a crucial factor in the abil-ity to scale capacity up and down fast. In such a blended workforce,offering maximal, prescriptive support to the inexperienced should notlead to spoon feeding (and consequently demotivating) the experts.4
declarative business processes: the unification of bpm approachesConclusionsRequiring organizations to select a single BPM approach up front forentire business processes or even families of processes is no longer anoption: Constraint levels vary within business processes and betweenindividual cases, and the corresponding types of application support,now coupled to different BPM stacks, need to be combined seamlesslyas a result.Adopting a declarative, constraint based approach to business pro-cesses allows organizations to focus on capturing the constraints of allrelevant stakeholders, without concerning themselves up front whichBPM stack is expected to match the nature of the processes that emergewhen all constraints are clear.The processes inferred from the constraints at execution time willautomatically adopt and switch between the types of process supportneeded, such as guiding users in effectively performing sequences ofactivities, or providing experts with maximal autonomy in selectingwhich activities to perform when.References[1] Jeroen van Grondelle and Menno Gülpers. Specifying FlexibleBusiness Processes using Pre and Post Conditions. In Practice ofEnterprise Modeling, volume 92 of Lecture Notes in Business Informa-tion Processing, pages 38–51, 2011.[2] Jeroen van Grondelle and Geert Rensen. Towards Webscale BusinessProcesses. Be Informed, 2013.About Be InformedBe Informed is an internationally operating, independent softwarevendor. The Be Informed business process platform transforms admin-istrative processes. Thanks to Be Informed’s unique semantic technol-ogy and solutions, business applications become completely model-driven, allowing organizations to instantly execute on new strategiesand regulations. Organizations using Be Informed often report costsavings of tens of percents. Further benefits include a much higherstraight-through processing rate leading to vastly improved produc-tivity, and a reduction in time-to-change from months to days.Copyright (C) 2013 Be Informed BVAll rights reserved. Nothing in thispublication may be duplicated, pub-lished or transmitted, using any meansor in any form whatsoever, without thepermission of Be Informed.Report no. BIRN-2013-02Version: 1.0.1June 13, 20135
ABSTRACT: When supporting front line employees, the required support is of a different nature than typical office work. In general, business processes delegate work to the most suitable person, defer execution if this person is not available and, in general, wait until all required information is available. This approach does not work when a single person has to deal with an externally triggered situation, typically on location and often even offline. Full-text · Technical Report · Dec 2013 ABSTRACT: With Big Data technologies delivering predictive, real time analytics on production data of unparalleled volumes, offering these insights in an actionable way across the operation becomes critical. Constraint based business processes allow organizations to leverage big data analytics in their daily operations. Processes can be optimized based on the emerg-ing trends and unexpected side effects detected across a broad spectrum of datasets. At runtime, autonomous actors are empowered by real time, case specific analytics to make expert decisions how to best proceed within the governing constraints. Full-text · Technical Report · Dec 2013 Technical ReportAugust 2016Technical ReportAugust 2016Conference PaperAugust 2016Conference PaperAugust 2016Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.We could not find any SHERPA/RoMEO information. Please check the publication restrictions.Last Updated: 08 Aug 16
oror log in with立刻致电！010-或给我留言。我会第一时间与您联系！
人力资源管理师培训-人力资源师培训报名、考试介绍以及人力资源相关学习资料
您当前的位置： &
& 浏览文章
案例分析：平衡计分卡在业绩评价中的应用
来源： 作者：Admin 发布时间： 字体:[
　　【摘　要】　借鉴国外同行的分类方法，结合中国企业的调查资料分析，平衡计分卡的实践分为评价和战略工具两种类型。本文从分析软件企业业绩评价特点出发，结合平衡计分卡的应用，分析阐述了软件公司如何利用平衡计分卡完善其绩效及战略管理系统。
【关键词】　平衡计分卡；业绩评价；战略管理；软件企业
一、平衡计分卡理念――卡普兰和诺顿的认识发展
　　平衡计分卡一经提出，就备受学者与实践工作者的关注。在其十五年的传播过程中，平衡计分卡的理念得到不断修正和发展，而实践者在实践过程中也不断修正和完善它们的体系。
　　实践者对平衡计分卡应用定位的差异，与平衡计分卡倡导者本身的理念发展密切相关。在平衡计分卡提出的早期，它是作为“创新的业绩评价工具”设计的。当时，传统的以财务为核心的业绩评价体系正面临学术界和实务界铺天盖地的批评。（6）（7）基于传统的财务信息评价模式的诸多弊端，平衡计分卡应运而生。
　　1992年，卡普兰和诺顿发表了“平衡计分卡:驱动绩效的度量”，要求管理聚焦于未来业绩的驱动力而不再仅仅是历史业绩。（8）这篇文章标志着新一代业绩评价工具―――平衡计分卡的诞生。1993 年，他们强调“计分卡通过要求管理者于四项观点分别选择有限个重要指标来协助其集中关注战略性愿景”，（9）突出了平衡计分卡满足每个组织的不同市场、战略和环境要求的重要性。1996年，他们将平衡计分卡定义为用于核心管理过程(资源分配、预算和计划、目标设定、员工学习)的集合框架，而新的管理过程被引进来帮助管理者将战略目标与行动相联系。（10）至此，平衡计分卡自简单业绩评价工具进化为战略管理工具。
　　平衡计分卡作为战略业绩评价系统的使用概括在他们的著作《平衡计分卡:化战略为行动》中，（10）随后二人又提出了战略图的管理工具，将平衡计分卡描述为一个全面的战略管理与控制系统。（10）由此可见，两位创始者对于平衡计分卡的认识发展即是平衡计分卡自业绩评价工具向战略管理工具角色的进化过程。
二、　软件企业的业绩评价特点及难度
　　由于软件行业技术的复杂性及专业性,使得软件上市公司对人力资源的要求非常高,对人才的依赖性非常强,可以说,软件企业人力资源是最重要的资源。软件企业正是通过研发人才的“脑袋”这一最重要的资源转化为真正的带来利益的产品。而且由于软件人才的流动市场化,软件企业需要留住掌握有特殊技术及具有经营管理软件企业经验的精英必定要付出有竞争力的薪资待遇,需要实施良好的薪资激励体制。正是由于软件行业这一“以人为本”的特性,软件研发人员的薪酬都普遍高于其它行业的企业。而由于研发项目的长期性及结果的不确定性以及不断变化的外部环境,使得对研发人员的绩效考核及工资薪金的评估产生很大难度。
　　由于软件项目的开发通常都是以项目组为单位,是一种团队协作,团队中会有分工不同及每位成员所起的作用不同,如何充分利用团队中各成员的优势,将个体技术有效转化为整个团队的优势对提高团队绩效有重要意义,有绩效才有团队及整个企业的发展。同时如何考核研发项目组团队中的每位研发人员的业绩也成为软件企业业绩考核的一个难点。
　　软件技术发展日新月异,软件企业要在激烈的竞争中获胜很重要的一点是要不断保持其技术的领先性。因此软件企业的相对于其他行业的企业更需要注意对员工投入大量的技术学习和培训来维持其员工队伍的技术优势。
　　此外,软件企业销售的软件产品区别于其他产品的一个很大的特点就是软件的后续维护和升级。软件企业要提高自己的客户满意度的一个可以利用的优势就是有优质的维护系统以及能够提供及时的升级服务。
　　根据以上这些软件企业的特点分析可以看出传统的绩效评价方法侧重于静态的,以财务报表为基础财务业绩评价,忽视了财务与非财务绩效指标的结合,并且未能与企业战略联系起来,对软件企业明显是不合适的。
三、　平衡计分卡在软件企业中的应用
　　平衡计分卡是平衡财务和非财务指标的一种绩效测评体系，是通过客户、财务、内部流程、学习和成长四个维度来测评研究对象。由于软件企业具有不同于其他行业企业的特点,其绩效考核就需要结合其特点全面合理的展开与进行。
（一）企业整体平衡计分卡（1）学习与成长维度的计分卡　　软件企业研发人才的流失不仅会影响企业中团队的研发计划,还会导致企业的核心技术流失,使得研发出来的产品失去竞争力。同时软件产品的更新换代快也决定了软件企业必须不断保持技术领先性。企业学习与成长维度计分卡可以主要从员工能力的增长,企业自身创新和学习能力的增长以及工作环境的吸引力三方面来衡量。主要的评价指标可以用定期培训的数量,员工掌握新技术的速度,员工的流失率,员工的满意度,企业对新信息的反应速度,利用新信息的有效性和开发产品的周期来考核。
（2）内部流程维度的计分卡　　软件企业需要根据市场的需要不断调整自己的研发项目计划,针对某一需要谁能立刻做出反应并率先开发出产品谁就能占领市场。内部流程中创新流程的考核指标可包括新产品开发速度、新产品销售额、率先推出新产品的数量、开发所耗费用等。而且由于软件产品需要后续升级的特性,对开发出的产品的后续的维护和升级能力,售后服务也对客户满意度有重要影响。售后服务流程考核指标主要包括企业对软件产品系统故障的反应率、处理率和成功率、对软件更新升级的速度和客户回款的时间和金额等。内部流程绩效衡量中还有一个主要的流程是营运流程,可通过开发的软件产品的故障率,产品市场宣传的有效性,市场动态指标分析等来衡量。
（3）顾客维度的计分卡　　在激烈的市场竞争中,企业的经营理念必须从生产为中心向以客户为中心转变。软件产品更是要根据客户的特点和需求来设计和开发。因为软件产品不同于一般的产品,它的专业性和专用性都很强,开发成本又很高。全面洞察客户对产品的需要是软件产品在设计和开发中应首先关注的。顾客维度的计分卡的主要评价指标有企业形象,客户满意度,客户投诉率,新客户增加率等。（4）财务维度的计分卡　　财务指标显示了企业的战略及其执行是否有利于利润的增加,考核指标主要包括软件企业的研发成本率、利润增长率、销售增长率,投资回报率等财务性指标。但应注意由于软件产品研发成功与否的不确定性,可能一定时期的投资并没有收到回报,企业在考察财务指标时不能只追求达到一定的财务指标,只关注短期利益,而是要看投入是否有利于企业长远发展。
（二）内部团队平衡计分卡　　软件开发大都是通过建立项目组,由项目组成员通过团队合作来完成的。企业整体平衡计分卡离不开企业内部各个部门和全体员工的积极参与,在设计软件企业内部团队平衡计分卡中要根据软件企业特点注意以下问题:
　　第一,在员工的学习和成长中应注意,由于软件企业对人才的特殊要求,员工的所掌握的技能直接转化为生产力。因此,软件企业的内部团队应特别注重要求员工培养自己的学习能力。同时也要加强团队学习,做到团队内成员的优势互补,形成融洽的团队文化和友好互助的团队精神,借助个人学习形成个人核心竞争力从而形成企业利润的制造源。
　　第二,在团队的内部组织结构上要更加人性化,给员工更大的发挥空间,使员工的个人价值得到充分体现,使员工有身为团队成员的自豪感。在团队中要使成员加强沟通和相互激励,有意见分歧通过协商解决,这样可以减少团队内成员间的摩擦,提高团队工作效率,减少开发成本。由于软件项目开发的团队合作特性,使得团队内每位成员贡献的不好确定,因此团队领导人应及时依据每位团队成员的对项目所做的贡献如技术共享程度加以肯定和评估,以增加员工的认可度,激发工作积极性。
　　第三,在顾客满意度方面,由于软件设计开发的模块化的趋势,现在很多大型软件都是分割成若干个小的模块来开发,这样可以提高开发效率,也能增加模块的通用性,降低开发成本。这样软件企业内部团队的顾客不仅有直接的客户消费者还有企业内部的其他团队。一个任务的完成需要企业内部各个团队互相协作完成。因此,软件企业内部团队不仅要考虑满足企业外部最终客户的需要,也要考虑企业内部其他合作团队的需要。
　　第四,在团队的财务效益方面,也应考虑软件开发的特点。无形资产这种看不见的资产的重要性对软件企业来说远比有形资产重要,所以不能只重视资产回报率等看的见的财务指标,而是要重视从团队的开发效能,技术更新速度等方面来考核团队的效益。
（三）员工个人平衡计分卡　　内部团队的平衡计分卡应进一步分解到每个员工。员工个人计分卡应考虑结合内部团队和与个人工作有关的其他团队来设计,而不能仅仅考虑个人的工作职责。根据软件企业的特点,软件企业的员工要注重自身技术更新,通过学习新技术,不断提高自己的创新能力,缩短研发时间,提高研发的成功率。而且要加强和企业内其他员工的协作与沟通,研发既要考虑市场的需求也要结合企业和团队的特点进行。
四、软件企业在实施平衡计分卡中应注意的问题
　　平衡计分卡是一套适应时代要求的全新的战略管理工具,要想在企业中发挥它应有的作用,要具备一定的前提条件。在实际应用中,软件企业使用平衡计分卡来组织绩效考评和管理企业应注意以下几个问题:
　　第一,首先企业管理者一定要制定清晰的企业战略目标。若企业没有明确整理的战略目标,或制定了目标没有对员工进行解释和宣传,内部团队和员工会感到目标不明确,无所适从。即使内部团队和员工个人根据自己的特点制定了目标也可能和企业整体发展战略相冲突,不利于企业的发展。明确战略目标后再把战略层层分解,转化为一系列目标衡量指标贯彻到行动中去。软件企业还可以充分利用自己的技术优势,建立网络化的平衡计分卡系统,处理大量的数据和信息,以提高管理效率。
　　第二,在软件企业这样的人力资源是企业最重要资源的企业更要加强与员工的沟通、交流。企业在实际应用平衡计分卡的中可能出现尽管强调不能从传统的单一的财务指标体系来考核企业和员工,但是在评价和奖励员工时还是只注重短期的财务数据。这会产生挫伤员工积极性,造成员工流失率增加等恶性循环的后果。同时也应注意,平衡计分卡在设计执行的过程中指标的设计不可能是一劳永逸的。在软件行业这样发展迅速,瞬息万变的市场,企业应时刻关注市场变化、客户需求和技术更新,对自己的战略目标和平衡计分卡的指标进行不断调整和完善。
　　平衡计分卡一方面采取从上到下的方式把企业愿景和高层次的战略转变为可操作性的定量目标、办法和措施,并分解到内部各个团队和员工个人变为他们的具体行动。另一方面,通过确定和改善计分卡上那些影响企业业绩的关键性指标,可以在企业内部部门之间取得协同和整合,使企业能集中精力对一些关键问题加以突破。它不仅是衡量企业绩效的工具,而且也是企业实现其战略的执行工具。软件企业在设计和施行平衡计分卡的过程中都要充分结合自己的特点,设计适合自己的平衡计分卡绩效评价和管理体系,并在实施中注意贯彻下去,不断改进和完善,在激烈竞争的软件市场中取胜。
【参考文献】
（1）　(美) 保罗•尼文,著. 胡玉明,等,译. 平衡计分卡实用指南[M ]. 北京:中国财政经济出版社, 2003.（2）　王化成,刘俊勇. 企业业绩评价研究回顾及卡普兰和诺顿的理论贡献[ J ]. 财会通讯, 2003 (12) .（3） 　苗为华. 以业绩为导向建设高效团队[ J ]. 现代管理科学, 2003 (5) .（4） 　裴正兵. 平衡计分卡的平衡性及其在战略管理领域的应用[ J ]. 财会通讯, 2005 (9) .（5）　柯树林. 平衡计分卡的改进设想[ J ]. 财会月刊, 2006 (6) .（6）Johnson H. T. , Kap lan R. K. Relevance Lost: theRise and Fall ofManagement Accounting [M ]. MA ,Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1987.（7） Kap lan, R. S. , Norton,D. P. The Balanced Scorecard:Measures that Drive Performance [ J ]. Harvard Busi2ness Review, 1992, (1 - 2).（8） Kap lan, R. S. , Norton, D. P. Putting the Balanced Scorecard to Work [ J ]. Harvard Business Review,1993, (9 - 10).（9）Kap lan, R. S. , Norton, D. P. Using the Balanced Scorecard as a StrategicManagement System [ J ]. Harvard Business Review, 1996, (1 - 2).（10） Kap lan, R. S. , Norton,D. P. The Balanced Scorecard:Translating Strategy into Action [M ]. Boston: Harvard Business Press, 1996.
上一篇：&&&&
& 下一篇： &&&&
赞助商链接}